Controversial? Dealing with lawbreakers and criminals is controversial?
Four of the justices will be perfectly fine with this, needless to say.
FORMER Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.)...
there fixed it for them.
Are they going to vote on resuming their duties to protect and defend the border?
Oh well! I guess their war on women is fading fast. I’ll bet their attention to illegals fades even faster. Democrats have no base. They are so full of it. They have 50 million on food stamps. That’s a hell of of a life you damn jackasses!!!!
What would happen if Pubbies en masse called out the dems as subversive for their support of crap like this. It’s worth a try to open some eyes.
That is correct. A few years ago I and my friend were stopped at a Border Patrol check point in South Texas. I identified myself as a citizen of the USA and my friend from England identified himself as from the United Kingdom. The agent then asked to see his passport. His passport was back at my home in Central Texas. The agent asked us a few more questions and informed my friend that he "must carry his passport at all times while in the United States." The Border Patrol agent was polite and courteous and sent us on our way.
This year when my friend came over again, when we went through the checkpoint I displayed my license and his passport. The agent was polite and courteous and said to my friend, "enjoy your vacation in The United States."
The point of my post is that Arizona wants to enforce the laws and statutes that are exactly the same as the those of the Federal Government of the United States.
By opposing this the Federal Government has in effect said, "The laws on immigration and illegal immigration can only be enforced by the Federal Government and not the individual states of the USA.
Using the same logic an officer in Arizona could not stop and hold or question an individual that is suspected of a Federal Crime but not a state crime. For example the following:
2. Murder on Federal Land in an Indian Nation.
3. The list of example would be endless. In effect any statute that has anything to do with national security, border control, interstate commerce, etc. would then be in the jurisdiction of the Federal Government and not the States.
Using this logic if a criminal commited interstate wire fraud in a scheme that only involved New York and California, the State of Arizona could not question, arrest or charge this individual if he were caught in Arizona.
The logic of the Justice department is not illogical. The logic is criminal. This is simply a power grab by the Federal Government that is political in nature and its purpose is to influence the Presidential Election this year.
The Obama Administration is corrupt and law breaking to its very core.
States apparently don’t have any rights anymore. The House of Lords has now decided they rule this country.
Won’t pass Congress.
Have at it.
This may be just bluster. Schumer wants Republicans to go on record for or against the AZ bill, but what he’s also forcing is putting a lot of Dems in swing states to go on the record as well. I doubt he’d get many of the Dems to vote his way and hand their GOP challengers a plum issue heading into the election.
I will vote against anybody in my district who votes to do away with the Arizona anti-immigration law. I promise!!!
Good luck Chuck getting the House to go along.